Re: Compatibility with Dell PowerEdge R250

On Fri, Jul 07, 2023 at 09:40:33AM +0300, Hassen Ibrahim wrote: > Greetings, > > I just purchased a Dell PowerEdge R250 server and was wondering if debian > 10 is compatible with this server. The server has an Intel Xeon E-2334 > processor, 32GB RAM and 6TB storage. I'll be looking forward to hear

Compatibility with Dell PowerEdge R250

Greetings, I just purchased a Dell PowerEdge R250 server and was wondering if debian 10 is compatible with this server. The server has an Intel Xeon E-2334 processor, 32GB RAM and 6TB storage. I'll be looking forward to hearing from you. Best regards Hassen Mulugeta

Re: [bullseye] ganglia-monitor-python compatibility

Bardo Bardo wrote: > Hi, > > Ganglia has some useful monitoring plugins such as diskstat, mysql, > postgresql, elasticsearch, advanced cpu metrics, ... i'm using theses > metrics for years, but since Debian 11 these modules are no longer > available, > Is there any idea why the package Ganglia Py

[bullseye] ganglia-monitor-python compatibility

Hi, Ganglia has some useful monitoring plugins such as diskstat, mysql, postgresql, elasticsearch, advanced cpu metrics, ... i'm using theses metrics for years, but since Debian 11 these modules are no longer available, Is there any idea why the package Ganglia Python Modules

how to check compatibility of (any party) package file? (and more)

Hi, My purpose is multiple here. First, I am trying to build a tool[1] to check a given package file (ie a .deb, whatever its origin) for the compatibility with Debian distribution versions, including if it may be required to have more sections (contrib, non-free) or a backports pool. I am able

Re: Compatibility of Debian 9 compiled files in Debian 11 version

On 2/10/22 09:54, Nagaraju Mulpuri wrote: Dear Debian Users, Greetings of the day! I have been using Debian 9 version for the last 4 years. Recently, my computer crashed. I have to install Debian OS again. I am planning to install Debian 11 version. I have many of my own programs compiled on th

Re: Compatibility of Debian 9 compiled files in Debian 11 version

On Thu, Feb 10, 2022 at 05:54:08PM -, Nagaraju Mulpuri wrote: > Dear Debian Users, > Greetings of the day! > I have been using Debian 9 version for the last 4 years. Recently, my > computer crashed. I have to install Debian OS again. I am planning to install > Debian 11 version. I have many o

Re: Compatibility of Debian 9 compiled files in Debian 11 version

On Thu, Feb 10, 2022 at 05:54:08PM -, Nagaraju Mulpuri wrote: > I have been using Debian 9 version for the last 4 years. Recently, my > computer crashed. I have to install Debian OS again. I am planning to install > Debian 11 version. I have many of my own programs compiled on the Debian 9 >

Re: Compatibility of Debian 9 compiled files in Debian 11 version

On Thu, Feb 10, 2022 at 05:54:08PM -, Nagaraju Mulpuri wrote: > Dear Debian Users, > Greetings of the day! > I have been using Debian 9 version for the last 4 years. Recently, my > computer crashed. > I have to install Debian OS again. I am planning to install Debian 11 > version. I have > ma

Compatibility of Debian 9 compiled files in Debian 11 version

Dear Debian Users, Greetings of the day! I have been using Debian 9 version for the last 4 years. Recently, my computer crashed. I have to install Debian OS again. I am planning to install Debian 11 version. I have many of my own programs compiled on the Debian 9 version. Compiled programs in De

Re: btfs disk compatibility between i386 and amd64

On Vi, 28 ian 22, 17:44:59, Joseph Brenner wrote: > > Careful, unlink in the *nix world typically means delete (a file), while > you probably meant unmount / mount. > > Yes, precisely. > > > > In general there shouldn't be a problem for newer kernels to read older > versions of a particular file

Re: btfs disk compatibility between i386 and amd64

> Careful, unlink in the *nix world typically means delete (a file), while you probably meant unmount / mount. Yes, precisely. > In general there shouldn't be a problem for newer kernels to read older versions of a particular file system[1], but the other way around can be a problem. That's int

Re: btfs disk compatibility between i386 and amd64

On Mi, 26 ian 22, 17:33:04, Joseph Brenner wrote: > I was wondering if the on-disk data format for btrfs is > compatible between the i386 and amd64 code bases-- > e.g. would you expect to be able to swap data drives > between machines running either? In general yes. > I've got an old i386 instal

btfs disk compatibility between i386 and amd64

I was wondering if the on-disk data format for btrfs is compatible between the i386 and amd64 code bases-- e.g. would you expect to be able to swap data drives between machines running either? I've got an old i386 installation with /home in it's own partition, and I'm wondering if I can expect to

Re: processor compatibility

On 11/13/21 22:39, deutsch_da...@tuta.io wrote: > Hello! Is the Intel Core i7-9750H processor supported by your operating > system? > Hi! The architecture of this processor is AMD64 so it's supported and you can use this image - https://cdimage.debian.org/cdimage/unofficial/non-free/cd-includin

Re: processor compatibility

Hello, On Sat, Nov 13, 2021 at 09:39:16PM +0100, deutsch_da...@tuta.io wrote: > Hello! Is the Intel Core i7-9750H processor supported by your operating > system? I don't have one but this suggests yes: https://linux-hardware.org/index.php?id=cpu:intel-6-158-10-core-i7-9750h That CPU is a c

processor compatibility

Hello! Is the Intel Core i7-9750H processor supported by your operating system? -- .

Re: 64bit ext4 and kernel version compatibility

On 1/9/20 2:02 AM, Klaus Singvogel wrote: R. Ramesh wrote: I want to make sure that my current kernel version does not have any limitation to support 64bit ext4. Please consult the Kernel Wiki regarding Ext4: https://ext4.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Main_Page You will notice that Linux

Re: Re: 64bit ext4 and kernel version compatibility

On Thu, Jan 09, 2020 at 05:06:29PM +, Tixy wrote: > On Thu, 2020-01-09 at 14:35 +0300, Reco wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 08, 2020 at 06:08:16PM -0600, R. Ramesh wrote: > > > Before I get the source and build and update e2fsprogs and then the > > > file system, I want to make sure that my current ker

Re: 64bit ext4 and kernel version compatibility

On Thu, Jan 09, 2020 at 05:06:29PM +, Tixy wrote: > On Thu, 2020-01-09 at 14:35 +0300, Reco wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 08, 2020 at 06:08:16PM -0600, R. Ramesh wrote: > > > Before I get the source and build and update e2fsprogs and then the > > > file system, I want to make sure that my current kern

Re: 64bit ext4 and kernel version compatibility

On Thu, 2020-01-09 at 14:35 +0300, Reco wrote: > On Wed, Jan 08, 2020 at 06:08:16PM -0600, R. Ramesh wrote: > > Before I get the source and build and update e2fsprogs and then the > > file system, I want to make sure that my current kernel version does > > not have any limitation to support 64bit e

Re: 64bit ext4 and kernel version compatibility

Hi. On Wed, Jan 08, 2020 at 06:08:16PM -0600, R. Ramesh wrote: > Before I get the source and build and update e2fsprogs and then the > file system, I want to make sure that my current kernel version does > not have any limitation to support 64bit ext4. You kernel should support the featur

Re: 64bit ext4 and kernel version compatibility

On Thu, 2020-01-09 at 09:02 +0100, Klaus Singvogel wrote: > R. Ramesh wrote: > > I want to make sure > > that my current kernel version does not have any limitation to support 64bit > > ext4. > > Please consult the Kernel Wiki regarding Ext4: > > https://ext4.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Main_

Re: 64bit ext4 and kernel version compatibility

R. Ramesh wrote: > I want to make sure > that my current kernel version does not have any limitation to support 64bit > ext4. Please consult the Kernel Wiki regarding Ext4: https://ext4.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Main_Page You will notice that Linux 2.6.28 was the first suppored kernel wi

64bit ext4 and kernel version compatibility

Hi,   On my DVR, I am running fairly old version of kernel (3.13.0-132-generic, mythbuntu 14.04.5 LTS). I want to convert ext4 fs on this server to 64bit so that I can grow it past 16TB limit. At that time of installation (2014), e2fsprogs did not support 64bit fs.  Now it does. Before I get

Re: Compatibility with DELL PowerEdge R440 Server

Aylwin wrote: > I am planning to order 4 units of Dell PowerEdge R440 Servers > . > Can you please advise me if Debian 9 64-bit can be installed without > any conflicts. If you plan on using the PERC RAID controller, you will most likel

Re: Compatibility with DELL PowerEdge R440 Server

On 10/21/2019 3:29 PM, Aylwin wrote: > Hi, > > > > I am planning to order 4 units of Dell PowerEdge R440 Servers > . > > > > Can you please advise me if Debian 9 64-bit can be installed without any > conflicts. > Do you realy insist on old

Compatibility with DELL PowerEdge R440 Server

Hi, I am planning to order 4 units of Dell PowerEdge R440 Servers . Can you please advise me if Debian 9 64-bit can be installed without any conflicts. Thanks and looking forward to your reply. Best regards, Aylwin Sales &

Re: Old problem for hardware compatibility: Thinkpad Lenovo SL400 Camera

Exactly. Currently I use Debian 9. I have not found a single way to put work my camera since Debian 7. El dom., 12 may. 2019 a las 11:48, Cindy Sue Causey (< butterflyby...@gmail.com>) escribió: > On 5/12/19, Georgi Naplatanov wrote: > > On 5/12/19 2:13 AM, Miguel A. Díaz D. wrote: > >> Dear Deb

Re: Old problem for hardware compatibility: Thinkpad Lenovo SL400 Camera

On 5/12/19, Georgi Naplatanov wrote: > On 5/12/19 2:13 AM, Miguel A. Díaz D. wrote: >> Dear Debian team, >> >> I would like to know if it is possible put to work the camera of an >> old Thinkpad Lenovo SL400 laptop. I have seen this issue in old posts >> for Ubuntu but a real solution is not reach

Re: Old problem for hardware compatibility: Thinkpad Lenovo SL400 Camera

On 5/12/19 2:13 AM, Miguel A. Díaz D. wrote: > Dear Debian team, > > I would like to know if it is possible put to work the camera of an > old Thinkpad Lenovo SL400 laptop. I have seen this issue in old posts > for Ubuntu but a real solution is not reached. There is no way to solve > this? I have

Old problem for hardware compatibility: Thinkpad Lenovo SL400 Camera

Dear Debian team, I would like to know if it is possible put to work the camera of an old Thinkpad Lenovo SL400 laptop. I have seen this issue in old posts for Ubuntu but a real solution is not reached. There is no way to solve this? I have read that driver was only available for Microsoft Windows

Re: unison compatibility in stretch

On Friday, 29 Dec 2017 at 11:27, Tony van der Hoff wrote: [...] > Syncthing appears to be an extremely powerful file synchronization tool, [...] > I've decided to give up on Syncthing, and revert to Unison, which means > upgrading my server, but hey, what are holidays for? Thanks for the updat

Re: unison compatibility in stretch

On 13/12/17 17:49, Tony van der Hoff wrote: > On 13/12/17 17:29, Anders Andersson wrote: >> On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 5:44 PM, Tony van der Hoff >> wrote: >>> On 13/12/17 15:40, Curt wrote: Sorry for butting in once again, but you do have unison-all installed, the metapackage which allows

Re: unison compatibility in stretch

On 13/12/17 17:29, Anders Andersson wrote: > On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 5:44 PM, Tony van der Hoff > wrote: >> On 13/12/17 15:40, Curt wrote: >>> Sorry for butting in once again, but you do have unison-all installed, >>> the metapackage which allows specifically for the -addversionno "kludge" by >>>

Re: unison compatibility in stretch

On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 5:44 PM, Tony van der Hoff wrote: > On 13/12/17 15:40, Curt wrote: >> Sorry for butting in once again, but you do have unison-all installed, >> the metapackage which allows specifically for the -addversionno "kludge" by >> bringing in versions 2.32 and 2.40 as per the follo

Re: unison compatibility in stretch

On 13/12/17 15:40, Curt wrote: > On 2017-12-13, Tony van der Hoff wrote: >> It seems the unison developers are a little careless with compatibility >> issues. This situation has arisen previously, then overcome by unison-all. >> >> Thanks for your suggestion of syn

Re: unison compatibility in stretch

On 2017-12-13, Tony van der Hoff wrote: >> > It seems the unison developers are a little careless with compatibility > issues. This situation has arisen previously, then overcome by unison-all. > > Thanks for your suggestion of syncthing; I'll give that a go... Sorry fo

Re: unison compatibility in stretch

ons: > > 1. build unison yourself on each system from source. > 2. try other tools such as syncthing. > > Hope you get this sorted! > It seems the unison developers are a little careless with compatibility issues. This situation has arisen previously, then overcome by unison-all

Re: unison compatibility in stretch

On Wednesday, 13 Dec 2017 at 12:49, Tony van der Hoff wrote: [...] > The server is running Jessie, the repository does not contain 2.48. > There appears to be no backport. > The client is running Stretch. Its repository does not contain anything > other than 2.48. > >>From what I can see froom go

Re: unison compatibility in stretch

On 12/12/17 11:58, Eric S Fraga wrote: > On Monday, 11 Dec 2017 at 10:36, Tony van der Hoff wrote: > > [...] > >> No: >> >> tony@tony-lx:~$ unison -addversionno tony >> Contacting server... >> bash: unison-2.48: command not found > But you do need to install the various versions you may to use on t

Re: unison compatibility in stretch

On 12 December 2017 at 21:16, Tony van der Hoff wrote: > On 12/12/17 08:50, Curt wrote: >> >> * workaroundable via symlink version number truncation bug >> > Thanks for your reply, Curt, but we appear to speak different languages ;) > > WVSVNTB? The mysterious "WVSVNTB" might be a reference to th

Re: unison compatibility in stretch

On 2017-12-12, Tony van der Hoff wrote: >>> tony@tony-lx:~$ unison -addversionno tony >>> Contacting server... >>> bash: unison-2.48: command not found >>> Fatal error: Lost connection with the server >>> >>> >> * workaroundable via symlink version number truncation bug >> > Thanks for your reply

Re: unison compatibility in stretch

On Monday, 11 Dec 2017 at 10:36, Tony van der Hoff wrote: [...] > No: > > tony@tony-lx:~$ unison -addversionno tony > Contacting server... > bash: unison-2.48: command not found But you do need to install the various versions you may to use on the server. Then the client can request to use the

Re: unison compatibility in stretch

On 12/12/17 08:50, Curt wrote: > On 2017-12-11, Tony van der Hoff wrote: >> On 10/12/17 19:40, Eric S Fraga wrote: >>> On Sunday, 10 Dec 2017 at 12:25, Tony van der Hoff wrote: >>> >>> [...] >>> In the passt, I've always worked round this by installing the lower version on my desktop and

Re: unison compatibility in stretch

On 2017-12-11, Tony van der Hoff wrote: > On 10/12/17 19:40, Eric S Fraga wrote: >> On Sunday, 10 Dec 2017 at 12:25, Tony van der Hoff wrote: >> >> [...] >> >>> In the passt, I've always worked round this by installing the lower >>> version on my desktop and adjusted the links. This appears no lng

Re: unison compatibility in stretch

On 10/12/17 19:40, Eric S Fraga wrote: > On Sunday, 10 Dec 2017 at 12:25, Tony van der Hoff wrote: > > [...] > >> In the passt, I've always worked round this by installing the lower >> version on my desktop and adjusted the links. This appears no lnger to >> be possible. >> >> Does anyone know how

Re: unison compatibility in stretch

On Sunday, 10 Dec 2017 at 12:25, Tony van der Hoff wrote: [...] > In the passt, I've always worked round this by installing the lower > version on my desktop and adjusted the links. This appears no lnger to > be possible. > > Does anyone know how to get round this? (I've no immediate intention to

Re: unison compatibility in stretch

On Sun, 10 Dec 2017 12:25:42 +, Tony van der Hoff wrote: > Hi, > > For years I've been using unison to keep common files amongst my various > systems. > > I now find that stretch provides version 2.48, whereas Jessie provided > 2.40, and they are not compatible. My server, which still runs J

Re: unison compatibility in stretch

On Sun, 10 Dec 2017 12:25:42 + Tony van der Hoff wrote: > Hi, > > For years I've been using unison to keep common files amongst my > various systems. > > I now find that stretch provides version 2.48, whereas Jessie provided > 2.40, and they are not compatible. My server, which still runs J

unison compatibility in stretch

Hi, For years I've been using unison to keep common files amongst my various systems. I now find that stretch provides version 2.48, whereas Jessie provided 2.40, and they are not compatible. My server, which still runs Jessie, will therefore not accept connections from my desktop box. In the pa

Re: [sane-devel] Compatibility of the Irisscan executive 4 scanner

Hi Alex, Sorry for the belated follow-up. Alex ARNAUD writes: > Le 28/09/2017 à 15:45, Olaf Meeuwissen a écrit: >> Hi Alex, >> >> Based on a quick `git grep -i iris` on the sane-backends source code, >> the only Irisscan device known to be supported is the "Express 2". If >> the "executive 4" h

Re: Scanner Compatibility question

On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 08:02:28PM +, J.W. Foster wrote: > I'm wondering if anyone here has used or been able to install a > scanner model: Canon - 9000F Mark II Flatbed Scanner - I personally use said model with a Debian testing box. It works perfectly, though I've never tried the 4-channel

Re: Scanner Compatibility question

On Tue 24 Oct 2017 at 20:02:28 +, J.W. Foster wrote: > I'm wondering if anyone here has used or been able to install a > scanner model: Canon - 9000F Mark II Flatbed Scanner - BlackI am > currently trying to decide if I can use this scanner with current > debian stable.  There is not much onli

Re: Scanner Compatibility question

e. most important is  the resolution as > this is for photographic work.Thanks!John > > According to SANEs scanner compatibility map (http://www.sane-project.org/sane-mfgs.html) the 9000F Mark II is fully supported. -- -- Backup not found: (A)bort (R)etry (P)anic

Re: Scanner Compatibility question

On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 08:02:28PM +, J.W. Foster wrote: > I'm wondering if anyone here has used or been able to install a scanner > model: Canon - 9000F Mark II Flatbed Scanner - BlackI am currently trying to > decide if I can use this scanner with current debian stable.  There is not > muc

Re: [sane-devel] Compatibility of the Irisscan executive 4 scanner

Le 28/09/2017 à 15:45, Olaf Meeuwissen a écrit : Hi Alex, Based on a quick `git grep -i iris` on the sane-backends source code, the only Irisscan device known to be supported is the "Express 2". If the "executive 4" has a USB port, could you provide the USB product ID? Connect the device, powe

Re: [sane-devel] Compatibility of the Irisscan executive 4 scanner

On Thu 28 Sep 2017 at 22:45:10 +0900, Olaf Meeuwissen wrote: > If you want to use SANE on Debian GNU/Linux, all you really need to do > is install the sane-utils package. Next make sure that your users are > members of the scanner and you should be able to use the `scanimage` > command-line utili

Re: [sane-devel] Compatibility of the Irisscan executive 4 scanner

Hi Alex, Alex ARNAUD writes: > Dear all, > > I install Debian GNU/Linux on computer for visual-impaired users and > I've a request about the compatibility of a Irisscan executive 4 scanner. > > I've sought on the internet without finding any specific data about thi

Re: [sane-devel] Compatibility of the Irisscan executive 4 scanner

Le 28/09/2017 à 15:45, Olaf Meeuwissen a écrit : Hi Alex, Alex ARNAUD writes: Dear all, I install Debian GNU/Linux on computer for visual-impaired users and I've a request about the compatibility of a Irisscan executive 4 scanner. I've sought on the internet without finding an

Re: Compatibility of the Irisscan executive 4 scanner

Op Thu, 14 Sep 2017 11:31:01 +0200 schreef Alex ARNAUD : Dear all, I install Debian GNU/Linux on computer for visual-impaired users and I've a request about the compatibility of a Irisscan executive 4 scanner. I've sought on the internet without finding any specific data

Compatibility of the Irisscan executive 4 scanner

Dear all, I install Debian GNU/Linux on computer for visual-impaired users and I've a request about the compatibility of a Irisscan executive 4 scanner. I've sought on the internet without finding any specific data about this model. Do you know if this model is compatible with S

Re: Debian hardware compatibility

On 20/04/17 12:33, Ben Caradoc-Davies wrote: Asus UEFI BIOS (H110I-PLUS BIOS 3202) defaults to incorrect turbo boost multipliers but I was able to manually set the correct "Per CPU" values in the BIOS. For a 7700K, these should be 45/44/44/44 if you are not overclocking (base clock 100MHz): https

Re: Debian hardware compatibility

On 20/04/17 17:12, John Elliot V wrote: Will stretch RC3 smoothly transition to stable (with an apt-get dist-upgrade) when stretch is released? You should not need to do anything. When stretch is released as stable, you will already be on it. Just make sure that, when stretch is released, you

Re: Debian hardware compatibility

On 21/04/17 00:15, John Elliot V wrote: On 20/04/17 01:14, Joshua Schaeffer wrote: I would recommend the 850 Evo vs the 850 Pro Thanks for the tip. I had considered the Evo but this: https://www.kosagi.com/forums/viewtopic.php?id=421 had me a little spooked. That is the 840 Evo. Completely d

Re: Debian hardware compatibility

John Elliot V wrote: > On 20/04/17 10:33, Ben Caradoc-Davies wrote: >> why not just install stretch from RC3? stretch is close to release. > > Sounds like a good idea! Thanks Ben. > > Will stretch RC3 smoothly transition to stable (with an apt-get > dist-upgrade) when stretch is released? if you

Re: Debian hardware compatibility

On Thursday, 20 April 2017 08:07:51 CEST Greg Wooledge wrote: > On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 03:12:33PM +1000, John Elliot V wrote: > > Will stretch RC3 smoothly transition to stable (with an apt-get > > dist-upgrade) when stretch is released? > > Yes. In fact there's a very strong possibility you won

Re: Debian hardware compatibility

On 20/04/17 01:14, Joshua Schaeffer wrote: > I would recommend the 850 Evo vs the 850 Pro Thanks for the tip. I had considered the Evo but this: https://www.kosagi.com/forums/viewtopic.php?id=421 had me a little spooked. I've already parted with my money for the Pro. I've made bigger mistakes

Re: Debian hardware compatibility

On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 03:12:33PM +1000, John Elliot V wrote: > Will stretch RC3 smoothly transition to stable (with an apt-get > dist-upgrade) when stretch is released? Yes. In fact there's a very strong possibility you won't even need to do a whole dist-upgrade. A simple "apt-get update; apt-

Re: Debian hardware compatibility

On 20/04/17 10:33, Ben Caradoc-Davies wrote: > why not just install stretch from RC3? stretch is close to release. Sounds like a good idea! Thanks Ben. Will stretch RC3 smoothly transition to stable (with an apt-get dist-upgrade) when stretch is released? > HD 630 iGPU is working fine for me wit

Re: Debian hardware compatibility

On 19/04/17 19:52, John Elliot V wrote: I'm getting a new workstation. Proposed specs are here: https://au.pcpartpicker.com/list/7MCfjc I tried to find out if my new hardware would run Debian stable, but couldn't confirm. CPU is Intel Core i7-7700K on an Asus STRIX Z270F mobo. I'm planning to dr

Re: Debian hardware compatibility

I don't think you'll have any issue with that set of hardware. If you've never done water cooling before then you'll be very happy with your H80i purchase. I have a Corsair Hydro H100i in both my Linux and Windows boxes and absolutely love them. I'll never do anything but CPU water cooling anymore.

Re: Debian hardware compatibility

John Elliot V wrote: > This is a multi-part message in MIME format. > --50ECA958FA859516FB3191E9 > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > I'm getting a new workstation. Proposed specs are here: > > https://au.pcpartpicker.com/list/7MCfjc > > I tri

Debian hardware compatibility

I'm getting a new workstation. Proposed specs are here: https://au.pcpartpicker.com/list/7MCfjc I tried to find out if my new hardware would run Debian stable, but couldn't confirm. CPU is Intel Core i7-7700K on an Asus STRIX Z270F mobo. I'm planning to drive two monitors from the onboard graph

RE: Debian Compatibility for CISCO UCS Servers

; 'Noufel Ibrahim'; 'Asanaka Jayakody' Subject: Re: Debian Compatibility for CISCO UCS Servers * Dilan Wijesooriya: > We need to install (bare metal ) Dabian 7 and Dabian 8 for bellow > CISCO Server model (Quantity 2) , can you pls let us know the > compatibility Of

Re: Debian Compatibility for CISCO UCS Servers

* Dilan Wijesooriya: > We need to install (bare metal ) Dabian 7 and Dabian 8 for bellow CISCO > Server model (Quantity 2) , can you pls let us know the compatibility > Of this , much appreciated your kind support and help for this project . Dear Dilan, you need to ask your hardware

Re: Wifi compatibility

On Thu 26 Mar 2015 at 19:45:27 +, Ricardo Cardante wrote: > Hi there. I have a Toshiba Satellite S50-B-131. Is my wifi driver supported? > Thanks in advance. Definitely. Get back to us when you have set it up successfully. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org

Re: Wifi compatibility

Ricardo Cardante writes: > Hi there. I have a Toshiba Satellite S50-B-131. Is my wifi driver supported? > Thanks in advance. I don't have one but some looking online suggests that it has the Intel AC 3160 which should work if you install firmware-iwlwifi from non-free, and a newer kernel like je

Wifi compatibility

Hi there. I have a Toshiba Satellite S50-B-131. Is my wifi driver supported? Thanks in advance.

Re: 32bit compatibility for NVidia binary drivers in wheezy backports

> And that's not impossible. libgl1-nvidia-glx depend on > xserver-xorg-video-nvidia. > And xserver-xorg-video-nvidia is not Multiarch-aware, i.e. you cannot > co-install xserver-xorg-video-nvidia:i386 and > xserver-xorg-video-nvidia:amd64 at the same time. It seems this problem has been fixed in

Re: 32bit compatibility for NVidia binary drivers in wheezy+backports

Hi. On Sun, 15 Feb 2015 20:41:54 +0100 Aleksandar Dimitrov wrote: > But if I try to install the 32 bit compatibility package from multiarch… > > > % aptitude install -t wheezy-backports nvidia-kernel-dkms:i386 Are you sure that you need to do this? This will install DKMS'

32bit compatibility for NVidia binary drivers in wheezy+backports

Hi list, I'm trying to install the NVidia binary package in Debian wheezy from wheezy-backports on a 64bit system — which went fine. I've added multiarch: > % dpkg --print-architecture > amd64 > > % dpkg --print-foreign-architectures > i386 But if I try to install

Re: Software compatibility between different architectures?

2014/08/10 20:30 "Martin T" : > > >> how compatible are drivers on ports for different CPU architectures, > >> e.g. I have a USB HSDPA modem which works great on Wheezy port for x86 > >> architecture, but can I expect it to work on Wheezy port for ARM? > > > > If your ARM platform's USB driver work

Re: Software compatibility between different architectures?

Martin T wrote: >>> how compatible are drivers on ports for different CPU architectures, >>> e.g. I have a USB HSDPA modem which works great on Wheezy port for >>> x86 architecture, but can I expect it to work on Wheezy port for >>> ARM? >> If your ARM platform's USB driver works, then yes, you

Re: Software compatibility between different architectures?

>> how compatible are drivers on ports for different CPU architectures, >> e.g. I have a USB HSDPA modem which works great on Wheezy port for x86 >> architecture, but can I expect it to work on Wheezy port for ARM? > > If your ARM platform's USB driver works, then yes, you can expect the > exact sa

Re: Software compatibility between different architectures?

> how compatible are drivers on ports for different CPU architectures, > e.g. I have a USB HSDPA modem which works great on Wheezy port for x86 > architecture, but can I expect it to work on Wheezy port for ARM? If your ARM platform's USB driver works, then yes, you can expect the exact same suppo

Software compatibility between different architectures?

Hi, how compatible are drivers on ports for different CPU architectures, e.g. I have a USB HSDPA modem which works great on Wheezy port for x86 architecture, but can I expect it to work on Wheezy port for ARM? Can one expect the same options(modprobe parameters) for drivers on all platforms? What

Re: capitalone banking website compatibility with iceweasel

On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 11:46 PM, Bret Busby wrote: > On 28/07/2014, kamaraju kusumanchi wrote: > > > > As a temporary work around, I am using chromium which works fine. > > > > Have you tried using Opera (http://www.opera.com/) as a web browser > for online banking? > > It could be worth trying

Re: capitalone banking website compatibility with iceweasel

Sorry, John. This was meant to go on list. On Monday 28 July 2014 15:19:34 John Hasler wrote: > Lisi writes: > > I want to change [from Iceweasel] to Firefox, which can't be worse... > > It can't be any different. Yes, it can. It is a later version. Lisi -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-u

Re: capitalone banking website compatibility with iceweasel

Ok - to firefox 101. Try in safe mode and see if the problem persists. If it doesn't, you have an add-in that's causing the problem. As for your bookmarks etc - you can always find your profile with about:support if you don't know where is is. You can save the whole profile directory using norm

Re: capitalone banking website compatibility with iceweasel

Lisi writes: > I want to change [from Iceweasel] to Firefox, which can't be worse... It can't be any different. -- John Hasler jhas...@newsguy.com Elmwood, WI USA -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lis

Re: capitalone banking website compatibility with iceweasel

On Monday 28 July 2014 13:21:24 Marc Auslander wrote: > For what its worth, the site is fine with the latest build of firefox > on debian (the 34a nightly). What firefox version is iceweasel? 31 on Wheezy using backports. (And it is awful. I want to change to Firefox, which can't be worse, but

Re: capitalone banking website compatibility with iceweasel

For what its worth, the site is fine with the latest build of firefox on debian (the 34a nightly). What firefox version is iceweasel? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://

Re: capitalone banking website compatibility with iceweasel

On 28/07/2014, kamaraju kusumanchi wrote: > The capitalone banking website (https://banking.capitalone.com/) is not > working with iceweasel. It does not display the login form. The error > message is > > "We're sorry, our system experienced an error displaying the login form." > > I tried install

Re: capitalone banking website compatibility with iceweasel

[TopPosting with appropriate apologies ;/ Contacting "Tech Support" not ALWAYS best route to solving tech problem. Contact your local branch manager with supporting documentation. For this approach to work you must: 1. supply good trouble shooting documentation 2. have established relation

Re: capitalone banking website compatibility with iceweasel

On Sun, 27 Jul 2014 12:46:31 -0400 kamaraju kusumanchi wrote: > The capitalone banking website (https://banking.capitalone.com/) > is not working with iceweasel. It does not display the login form. > The error message is > > "We're sorry, our system experienced an error displaying the login > fo

capitalone banking website compatibility with iceweasel

The capitalone banking website (https://banking.capitalone.com/) is not working with iceweasel. It does not display the login form. The error message is "We're sorry, our system experienced an error displaying the login form." I tried installing xul-ext-useragentswitcher and used Iceweasel -> Too

OT: Roxterm US English compatibility

$ roxterm --help | grep max -m, --maximise Maximise the window, overriding profile --maximize Synonym for --maximise $ xfce4-terminal --help | grep max --startup-id=string; -I, --icon=icon; --fullscreen; --maximize; :D -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to

re: Compatibility of libs for Berkeley DB (libdb5.1-dev or libdb4.8-dev)

I cannot install libdb4.8-dev + libdb4.8, because it conflicts with libdb5.1. This does not seem to be true, the dev packages conflict but afaict the libraries themselves (at least the versions from debian squeeze and wheezy) do not. So as long as you don't need libdb5.1-dev installed you shou

Compatibility with Asus A42?

Hi guys, Just wondering if there are hardware drivers available for the Asus A42 laptop on the FreeBSD version of Debian? Kind regards, Robert Kochanski -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debi

  1   2   3   4   5   6   >